Advocacy & Safety - Cyclist Fatality in Portland, Oregon

PORTLAND - A 23-year-old bicyclist is dead after being hit by a car in Southeast Portland early Monday.

It happened at Southeast 49th Avenue and Stark Street when the suspect driving a 1999 Honda Civic, struck the bicycle from behind. The force of the collision sent Noah Jacob Madison Cardamon into a Saturn parked at the curb.

He was not wearing a helmet, and died at the scene.

Investigators think the driver of the car and the passenger tried to conceal evidence after the crash.

Police also believe alcohol was involved. The driver involved is 18-year-old Dana Abdullah. She is charged with one count of criminally negligent homicide. Passenger 19-year-old Shana Dawn Foster, is charged with one count of hindering prosecution and one count of interfering with police.

News:
http://www.kptv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3407873
http://katu.com/stories/77451.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1117533538193220.xml&coll=7

Discussion:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/318416.shtml
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/318456.shtml

Outrageous. The discussion links say it all.

I like how The Oregonian stpry went into detail about his life and interests, instead of treating him like just another statistic.

I'll be interested in learning if a helmet might have made a difference.

I quote from an article in Cycle magazine, published by the CTC (UK). It is written by Brian Walker, of helmet-testng lab, Head Protection Evaluations and is not about whether or not one should wear a helmet, but about what the helmet is designed to do.

It is too long to summarise, but one paragraph is as follows:
Quote begins
"Cycle helmets are primarily designed for falls without any other vehicle involved. In many legal cases I have studied, where a cyclists was incollision with a motorised vehicle, the impact energy potentials wer of a level that outstriped those that we use to certify Grand Prix motor racing helmets."
End quote

Dr Mayer Hillman's study for the British Medical Assoc. showed that, in approx 92% of all cyclist fatalities involving fatal head injuries, the rider would have died from other causes anyway, even had the head injuries not occurred.

Wearing, or not wearing a helmet is often a red herring, tho' I always do in the hope that it will save me from minor injuries.

DUI laws need to be made tougher. Longer prison sentences for 1st time offenders would be nice. Prison time in conjunction with asset forfeiture would be even nicer.

how about along with longer prison sentences the licence should be susppended for 2 or more years.

Seriously, suspend their license for 2 years. It's not like they have to drive!

Sad. Hopefully as accident investigators and medical folks piece together the particulars, lessons will be learned which may benefit many of us.

Lot of misinformation in the discussion. Here's one:

"It's probably the car drivers' fault in almost all car-bike injuries -- but being in the right doesn't help the bicyclist to physically heal." - Lisa Parsons

Actually, the cyclist is at fault in most car-bike collisions, and could have avoided the collision, though not his fault, in most of the others (using standard defensive driving techniques).

More relevant than the helmet question is the lights question - did the collision happen in the dark, and, if so, did the cyclist have lights?

More relevant than the helmet question is the lights question - did the collision happen in the dark, and, if so, did the cyclist have lights?


From the second link: "Police say the bicycle was equipped with lights, but investigators have not yet determined if the lights were operating at the time of the collision."

suckage... stupid the girls lied about it... now it worse for them but they made the choice to drive drunk so i hope she gets whats coming...

Actually, the cyclist is at fault in most car-bike collisions, and could have avoided the collision, though not his fault, in most of the others (using standard defensive driving techniques).
Actually, according to police reports, in motorist-bicyclist crashes, the ratio of motorists to cyclists at fault is 58% motorist at fault to 42% bicyclist at fault in Portland, Oregon.

... Actually, the cyclist is at fault in most car-bike collisions ...

For cautious, responsible cyclists, including the lawful vehicular ones, the MOTORIST is almost always at fault. Isn't avoiding collisions through proper cycling technique the big selling point of vehicular cycling? Be consistent, Serge.

suckage... stupid the girls lied about it... now it worse for them but they made the choice to drive drunk so i hope she gets whats coming...

Has it been verified that the driver was drunk? All the reports that I read said that alcohol was involved but the legal determination had not yet been made.

Is there no presumtion of innocence in Oregon? Or do you guys want to bring back lynching?

From the second link: "Police say the bicycle was equipped with lights, but investigators have not yet determined if the lights were operating at the time of the collision."

Maybe that's why they're being charged with a harsher crime. They might have turned off all his lights, ripped off any reflectors, and then lied.

suntreader She was under 21 it doesn’t matter what her levels are its illegal for anyone u under 21 to have it in there system... read the news reports... she broke the law by drinking then someone got killed... ill watch the 11 o clock news and tell u what they say... Oh yea and I got the rope ready im gonan run down to the jail and break in shoot all the cops then string the rope around a branch and hang her.. Yea u got it right there buddy.... no she will goto trail and either be set free or held responsible... Oh and about the lynching thing oregon has had 21 from 1882-1962 and South Carolina has had a 160 and u dotn want me to go into stats on that

Seriously, suspend their license for 2 years. It's not like they have to drive!

Suspending a license does not work. People drive anyway. They need to take their car away and put it through a car crusher with them watching. Then their name goes on a list and no legitimate car dealer can sell them another car.

cool figured u woudl go after that you win...

I geuss i should also ask is it legal for people to drink under 21 in SC?

here is what she is being charged with

CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE

Any person who commits criminally negligent homicide is guilty of a crime.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the state must have proven beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the following essential elements:1

(1) that the defendant's conduct resulted in the death of the alleged

victim;

and

(2) that the defendant acted with criminal negligence.

"Criminal negligence" means that a person acts with criminal negligence with respect to the circumstances surrounding that person's conduct or the result of that conduct when the person ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the accused person's standpoint.2

The requirement of criminal negligence is also established if it is shown that the defendant acted intentionally, knowingly or recklessly.3

"Intentionally" means that a person acts intentionally with respect to the nature of the conduct or the result of the conduct when it is the person's conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduct or cause the result.4

"Knowingly" means that a person acts knowingly with respect to the conduct or to circumstances surrounding the conduct when the person is aware of the nature of the conduct or that the circumstances exist. A person acts knowingly with respect to a result of the person's conduct when the person is aware that the conduct is reasonably certain to cause the result.5

"Recklessly" means that a person acts recklessly with respect to circumstances surrounding the conduct or the result of the conduct when the person is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the accused person's standpoint.6

Rear-end hits are almost always fatal, but rare. Use a rear-view mirror.

I geuss i was talkign to a freind she said that they where actually drinking in the car also...